Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Corporate Evil, Crap Products In History, Culture, Film, Food, Government, Health, Marketing, McDonalds
Oh my god, it’s October 1.
We are in the last quarter of 2026 and this is good news for a heap of reasons.
+ 2026 hasn’t been the best year so we only have 90 days till the fuckers over.
+ It means we’re officially counting down to one of the best places in the World for summer.
+ Which also means we’re approach one of the greatest festive holiday periods in the universe.
Suddenly, there’s so much optimism and happiness in my world – hahaha. Unfortunately for you, that means you still have 3 months of my ranting rubbish to deal with so let’s start getting it over and done with, with this post …
Do you remember the movie Super Size Me?
It was a documentary by Morgan Spurlock about McDonald’s and what happens to the body if that’s all you eat for a month.
It caused a huge stir for a whole host of reasons.
+ It brought the issue of obesity to the forefront of conversation.
+ It revealed the exploitation of those from more humble backgrounds.
+ It talked about the tension between convenience and quality.
+ It showed the power and influence of corporate farming.
Now was the film perfect?
God no … the book Fast Food Nation did a much more balanced and informed job at doing that. And then there’s the fact Morgan Spurlock was later revealed to be a problematic character – which permanently took the shine off his breakthrough film.
But all that aside, the impact of his movie was pretty swift.
McDonald’s launched a range of healthy alternatives.
They ensured the calorie content of their food was easily available.
And they reminded people that a daily diet of Maccas was not great for your health.
Except – as is the case with most corporations – they worked hard to restore things back into their sweet zone through product and marketing promotions, such as the 99 cent burger deals and the – admittedly brilliant – ‘famous orders’ campaign.
Zoom forward to now and the issue of obesity and fast food is widely known and accepted … and yet, rather than things getting better, they are arguably getting even worse.
More fast food companies.
More calories per meal.
More desire for convenience.
Rise of mukbang culture.
Add to this an economic crisis which means people are increasingly choosing food based on price than quality – not to mention, as I have discovered first hand, how much it costs to eat healthily – and Super Size Me looks more like a dark-comedy than a documentary.
But the ultimate proof that things are bleak for health is that every company is trying to exploit the high-calorie gravy-train.
Yep, that’s KitKat cereal.
From Nestle … the company who states they are all about ‘good food, good life‘.
Hmmmmmn, sorry to burst their bubble but 24.7 grams of sugar, 10.9 grams of fat and roughly 420 calories per 100 grams is not good for anyone – especially the kids they’re obviously targeting.
“But hang on Rob …”, I hear their lawyers cry. “… we recommend a bowl of 30g for kids, which is only around 126 calories”
And maybe that’s true except …
1. The 126 calorie figure DOESN’T include milk, which puts it to around 170.
2. You know what people think is a 30g portion and what it actually is are wildly different.
3. You openly acknowledge it should only be an occasional breakfast because of its lack of goodness – reinforced by the fact even you’re too embarrassed to mention its real calories on your own official website.
[I should point out I’ve not seen their ads for this product, but the usual approach food companies use for selling ‘high-sugar, children targeted foods’ is to say it provides ‘energy’ for growing kids. Which may be true, but also blatantly gaslighting at the same time]
Look, I believe we all have to take responsibility for our own health … but I also believe it’s very difficult when times are tight, good food costs a fortune and we’re surrounded by a whole host of cheap convenience.
So while it’s ultimately our decision and choice, I can’t help but think the Government have a role to play in all of this.
Because if they are here to ensure the health, happiness and wealth of the nation is sustainable … then surely any food company who undermines that through the distribution of products they know are bad for the health and wellbeing of millions, should be considered a potential threat to the nation.
Is that extreme? Maybe.
But let’s face it, they’ve shown they don’t really care about it.
I mean, on one hand you know what you’re dealing with, with Maccas … but when ‘responsible food companies’ like Nestle prove they don’t give a shit, maybe there is a reset that needs to be set.
And while I’m not suggesting they are kicked out – can you imagine the headlines in The Daily Mail if they did that? – maybe they could find some ways to either make it less economically beneficial to keep pushing bad shit on us or to encourage more ways to make good shit more economically available and accessible to us all.
Jesus Christ … who have I become?!
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Agency Culture, AI, Attitude & Aptitude, Brands, Business, Conformity, Consultants, Context, Corporate Evil, Corporate Gaslighting, Crap Marketing Ideas From History!, Crap Products In History, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Empathy, Technology
I appreciate the commercial benefits of being associated with technology – especially technology that’s at the forefront of change – but I’m getting fed up of companies shoving the letters A and I ahead of everything they do in a desperate attempt to look cutting edge.
Do they realise they’re not fooling anyone – except, maybe themselves?
Have they forgotten what happened to WeWork when they persisted in their claims to be a tech company when even Stevie Wonder could see they were nothing more than an office space rental firm.
But it’s happening everywhere with everyone claiming everything they do is now ‘AI shaped/influenced/enabled.
AI project management systems
AI consultancy services.
AI home theatre systems.
AI photocopiers.
AI toilets.
AI. Ai. AI.
And even if I accept all these things now have some element of AI in their process and product, how come so much of them operate exactly as they did before?
All that advanced tech and everything still operates the same way as it always has.
That can’t be very good can it?
Surely that means the people behind it are either idiots, attempting to gaslight their customers or they have used AI to remove employees roles so they can squeeze out the last remnants of profit before they scraper and enjoy sitting on their millions.
While I’m at it …
Why is it the worst offenders of this sort of behavior tend to be the most conservative and traditional companies and industries?
[You can tell who they are as they tend to use images like the one at the top of this post because they think that proves they’re all about the ‘future’, haha]
On one hand I appreciate their desire to modernize, but the problem is – if the only thing that changes is the speed they can do things or the price they can do them for … then arguably, they’re proving they haven’t got the faintest idea what AI could do for them if they’re limiting its use to efficiency and productivity.
So to all brands jumping on the AI bandwagon …
Using Claude to speed up your manufacturing process doesn’t mean you’re an AI company.
Using ChatGPT to write articles about your products does not mean you make AI tech.
And positioning any form of automation as AI does not mean you’re a cutting-edge tech company.
Am I exaggerating?
Yes. But not nearly as much as you may imagine …
Every day I see ads and articles from companies claiming AI is at the centre of all they do.
Products.
Service.
Systems.
Manufacturing.
Marketing.
You name it, someone is saying it … which is why the best way to tell ‘who is trying’ versus ‘who is claiming’ is to embrace the same evaluation criteria as used to judge strategy, which is:
Can customers, employees and competitors notice a fundamental difference between how things were and how things now operate and behave?
If they can’t, it’s hype or self-serving commerciality. You’re welcome.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Airports, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, British, Business, Cars, Corporate Evil, Crap Products In History, London, Luxury
Recently, while walking through Heathrow Airport, I saw this:
Put aside the fact these airport shuttles seem to be for either the elderly, the late or the self-important … why the fuck do they need to have one that looks like the bastard lovechild of Liberace and Elton John’s cars from the 1970’s?
Is it a special edition thing?
Is it an business class, collab thing?
Is it a alarming lack of taste thing?
Or is it a tourist thing?
I could kinda understand if it was for tourists as I can imagine it would be very appealing for Americans of a certain age.
But even then, it’s still pants – exemplified by the fact it has a number plate that represents the name of the company who made/drives it.
And that’s before I point out the British Car Industry – that this thing is probably trying to leverage – is, at best, on its knees or, at worst, owned by everyone other than the Brits.
For fucks sake, is there no end to what we will make ‘status’?
What next … lifts?
I’d rather have a lifetime flying Ryan Air than one trip in that pile of gold shite.
Hell – to paraphrase a very old joke – I’d rather be seen coming out the back of a sheep than the back of that, which not only captures just how ridiculous I find an ‘upper class’ milk float at an international airport but also how too many companies confuse charging a ‘premium price’ with being a ‘premium product’.
Or as my friend, George, calls it, ‘corporate status delusion’.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Aspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Brand Suicide, China, Cliches, Clothes, Comment, Communication Strategy, Complicity, Consultants, Context, Craft, Crap Products In History, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Cynic, Delusion, Distinction, Equality, Fake Attitude, Imposter Syndrome, London, Perspective, Planning, Point Of View, Professionalism, Relevance, Reputation, Resonance, Respect, Wieden+Kennedy
This is a post about naming strategies.
Yes, I know I’ve talked about this before.
A lot of times before.
The processes.
The considerations.
The complications.
… but mainly it’s been about how certain branding consultancies charge an absolute fortune to come up with some utter nonsensical bullshit that they back up with 1000’s of pages of self-serving pseudo-science bullshit and still end up creating something pants. Kind of like the explanation of the Pepsi rebrand from 15 years ago. Or most Linkedin ‘guru’ pontification.
But the other side of this is when people choose to put no effort in whatsoever.
Hiding their recommendation behind terms such as ‘colloquial context’ or ‘cultural vernacular’.
Don’t get me wrong, there are times where a stripped back approach can be powerful.
A way to connect to society by taking their cultural references and contexts head-on.
Hell, cynic used to embrace an approach that we literally called, ‘unplanned‘.
However, while this was about removing any element of pomposity, it still had to elevate how people saw or connected to what we did. Any fool can churn out lowest common denominator stuff … but it takes a certain amount of skill and flair to develop something that not only connects and engages the masses, but does it in a way where the value of the product/brand is increased and improved to all.
We used to call this ‘massperation’ … which still makes me feel sick even today, hahahaha.
I say all this to justify something I saw recently.
Or should I say something Otis saw recently.
You see down the road from us there’s a house being built.
It’s in full-on construction mode and as it is on the way to Otis’ school, he passes it every day.
Anyway, one day he came and told me he’d seen the building site loo and was shocked with its name.
It was this:
That’s right, it’s called the ‘Shitbox’.
To be honest, I’m not sure if Otis should have been more surprised at the name or the fact it proudly states it’s a ‘high viz’ toilet box.
HIGH FUCKING VIZ!
Is the toilet going to be walking along the street late at night? Do builders have such bad eyesight they can’t find a 6 foot high toilet without it being painted bright orange? Are construction workers such bad drivers they need to be warned of where the portaloos are so as not to hit them?
WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK?
Anyway, I digress.
The point is that while calling the portaloo a ‘shitbox’ may make sense … I can’t help but feel it is also playing into the builder cliche. Sure, cliches happen because they represent a common behavior or attitude that is played out over a sustained period of time … but often this is only a ‘perceived’ behavior or attitude [usually promoted by an individual or organisation who have found a way to monetise the acceptance of this view] that victimizes anyone who does not live upto the cliche.
I appreciate you may think I’ve gone full-on woke … but apart from the fact I don’t think considering others is a bad thing, I see this behaviour over and over again.
Hell, even Jaguar – with their ‘interesting’ rebrand did it by revealing their new concept cars in pink and blue.
PINK AND FUCKING BLUE.
They made such a big deal about how they ‘delete ordinary’, ‘break moulds’ and ‘copy nothing’ and then they actively, loudly and proudly reinforce the most basic of gender stereotypes. On the World fucking stage!
I totally appreciate you can go over-the-top with this stuff – especially given this whole post was inspired by a building site portaloo. I also get people may think I am suggesting we should name products/brands with words that offer no defining characteristic to avoid any potential stereotype. But neither of those are what I’m trying to say.
All I am attempting to point out is that words matter. And while I fully appreciate naming is a difficult task, I find it fascinating companies spend millions on ‘solutions’ that tend to fall into either pompous, basic or made-up.
Or said another way, names that define, limit or pander rather than celebrate those who use them and the reasons they do.
Filed under: Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Bands, Brand, Brand Suicide, Communication Strategy, Complicity, Context, Crap Products In History, Creativity, Culture, Delusion, Egovertising, Embarrassing Moments, Fashion, Marketing, Marketing Fail
One of the worst things marketing has done is destroy the meaning of the English language.
I don’t mean with their desperate attempts to make their slogans and tropes part of popular vernacular – though that is also true – I mean it in terms of them literally and consistently destroying the meaning of words.
Over the years, I’ve seen all manner of examples …
From positioning a new brand of toilet cleaner as an innovation.
To claiming a new flavor of ‘Chicken Tonight’ is revolutionary.
And just recently, the most 80’s of 80’s band, being promoted as a symbol of rebellion.
Don’t get me wrong, I like Duran Duran.
Hell, back in my session guitarist days, I even played with Simon Le Bon … but even when they went through their ‘Wild Boys’ macho phase, they were about as dangerous and rebellious as Paddington Bear.
What the hell are the people behind this thinking?
Do they actually think Duran Duran are a badge of rebellion or is it more a case of them suggesting you’re a rebel if you actively choose to wear a shirt that does not feature the name of a modern music icon emblazoned all over the front?
If that’s the case, then I must be Satan personified. Or I was, prior to losing weight – hahaha.
But regardless of the reason, they’re either gaslighting, exploiting or as delusional as fuck.
What next, the color beige gets branded as controvertial?
Or maybe green ‘Starbursts’ get called confrontational?
Or possibly the entire marketing industry claims they are dangerous-as-fuck?
To paraphase Ronald Reagan and Lee Hill [who made his comment in relation to companies who have to overtly state and explain why their company, product or campaign is revolutionary/innovative/rebellious or even effective] …
“If you have to explain it, you’re probably not it”.